Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/11/2005 P&Z Minutes CITY OF L I NO LAKE S PLANNING & Z O NING BOARD MINUT E S DATE : May 11, 2005 TIME STARTED : 6:32 P.M. TIME ENDED : 9:41 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Hyden, Laden, Nelson, Pogal z , Rafferty, Root, and Tralle. MEMBERS ABS E NT : None. STAFF PRESENT : Jeff S m yser; Michael Grochala; and James Studenski; Paul Bengtson I. CAL L TO ORDE R AND ROL L CAL L Chair Rafferty called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Boar d m eeting to order at 6:32 p.m ., May 11, 2005. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Rafferty added the VFW prope rty to the end of the agenda. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 13, 2005 Chair Rafferty reques t ed the followin g change: P a ge 5, third paragraph from the bottom, last s e nten ce to read : He thanked the Board for their work on this developm ent and agreed with Mr. Pogalz comments regarding the screening, but expr essed concern that although this was in written form , ther e were no visual plans and the Board really needed to address it visually a nd not leave it to the unknown . Mr. Tralle m a de a MOTION to approve th e April 13, 2005 Minutes as am ended and was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6-0. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Rafferty declared open m i ke open at 6:35 p.m . There was no one present for Open Mike Mr. Pogalz m a de a MOTION to close Open Mi ke at 6:36 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6-0. APPR OVE D MINUTE S Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 2 APPROVED MINUTES V. ACTION ITEMS A. Final Plat for Legacy at Woods Edge, Village No. 3, located at the SE intersection of Lake Drive and I-35W Staff stated that the applicant had submitte d the final plat for Village No. 3, which encompasses the Legacy at Wood’s Edge proj ect area. The submitted plat depicts three lots and five outlots. He indicated the final plat conforms to the preliminary plat layout approved with Resolution 04-33 by the City Council on Ma rch 8, 2004. The title commitment for the property and final plat has been forwar ded to the City Attorney for review. As required by the Development Agreement, the village green is being dedicated as public park, and outlot C which includes the we tland area will be deeded over to the City. A trail easement is required on the south side of Lots 1 and 2, but the exact location and size has not yet been determined by the City’s consulting engi neer for this project. Staff is recommending that the street names be altered prior to the plat being scheduled for the City Council. Particularly, the use of the eastern most segment of Town Center Parkway should be changed to Woods Edge Boulevard, and the existing Woods Edge Boulevard should be changed to Village Drive. Village Green should be eliminated as that section is not a full street but rather the south half of what will be Village Drive divided by the Village Green park which is essentially an enlarged boulevard between two lanes of traffic. Staff was recommending approval subj ect to the following conditions: 1. The eastern most segment of Town Ce nter Parkway must be renamed Woods Edge Boulevard prior to this item being scheduled by the City Council. 2. Woods Edge Boulevard must be renamed as an extension of Village Drive prior to this item being scheduled for the City Council. 3. Village Green must be renamed as an extens ion of Village Drive prior to this item being scheduled for the City Council. Chair Rafferty asked if the righ t angles of the roads being pr oposed were a benefit or a detriment to this development. Mr. Bengtson replied this did conform to the Master Plan that had been approved and the plans had been reviewed by the Consulting Engineer. Mr. Studenski replied those we re the right-of-way areas so it did not imply specifically that the roads would be applied in that way. He stated they would soften the radiuses if necessary, but they felt confident this proposal would work. Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to recommend approval of the Final Plat for Legacy at Woods Edge, Village No. 3, located at the SE intersection of Lake Drive and I-35W subject to the conditions as noted in st aff’s May 11, 2005 report and was supported by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 6-0. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 3 APPROVED MINUTES B. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow for an awning at Rehbein Transit, 6298 Hodgson Road Chair Rafferty continued the Public Hearing at 6:43 p.m. Staff stated Rehbein Transpor tation is proposing an 8 foot x 100 foot awning addition to the north side of the existi ng facilities at 6298 Hodgson Road. The Rehbein property is covered by a conditional use permit for the exis ting bus transit center. Building additions much as those proposed in this application require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. Construction of the addition was begun prior to the issuance of the appropriate building permits or this applicatio n and was stopped by the City’s Building Department. No further construction has taken place after the first warning was issued by a building inspector. Under the new zoning ordinances, the site plan review is done administratively. However, a Conditional Use Permit amendment is necessary, and a site plan review is part of the CUP review. Because this application invol ves the CUP amendment, it is also appropriate to review the conditions placed on the site th rough the last CUP amendment in 1999. This application was continued at the Apr il 13, 2005 regular meeting so the applicant could be present to answer questions in regards to future plan s for the site as well as the intended use of the canopy addition. Staff recommended approval of the CU P subject to the following conditions: 1. Construction must comply with the require ments of the Centennial Fire department, including the connection of the existing buildings to municipal water for fire sprinkling. 2. A performance agreement between the City and the developer must be executed prior to the issuance of any building permits for the subject site. 3. A lighting plan in conformance with the zoning code must be submitted for review and approval by staff prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. The proposed addition is subject to double permit fees as construction was begun prior to the issuance of any building permits. 5. No outdoor storage of materials shall be allowed under the canopy. Mr. Nelson stated he did not believe the a pplicant was in compliance with the lighting requirements. Mr. Bengtson replied they di d not have a lighting plan to review to determine if those lights were a part of the last CUP, or if they were already in existence. Mr. Nelson stated he understood that all ligh ting needed to be directed downward and this had not been done. Mr. Be ngtson replied he was not sure how this was enforced at the time, but they were given a Certif icate of Occupancy for the building. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 4 APPROVED MINUTES Chair Rafferty noted condition three addressed the lighting. He aske d if a lighting plan would be submitted. Mr. Bengtson replied th ey were only looking at this addition and not the entire site. He stated staff would not typically retroa ctively review the entire site. Mr. Tralle noted this had been tabled for a month and it gave appli cant the opportunity to come into compliance with the conditions, whic h he did not do. He indicated he was not comfortable approving this because he had not met the conditions of the first CUP, including fire sprinkling. Mr. Bengtson repl ied that the applicant had indicated there would not be additional lighting with this pr oposal and they were going to comply with the fire sprinkling requirement. Mr. Tralle noted recommendation three was the same in this request as it was in the previous CUP. Mr. Root stated he had the same concerns previously mentioned. He asked if it was appropriate to review the performance of the current situation versus the requirements of the 1999 CUP to see if there were any violati ons to the previous conditions before they moved forward. Mr. Bengtson replied the Boar d could look at the pr evious situation if they wanted. Mr. Root asked if the Board could add the previous conditions to the proposed new conditions. Mr. Bengtson repl ied that could be done. Mr. Pogalz asked if the applicant would be reimbursed for any co st associated with obtaining a photometric plan if it was determin ed the lighting was in compliance. Mr. Bengtson stated that the app licant would not be reimbursed. Chair Rafferty invited applicant to make comment. Reid Rehbein, 6298 Hodgson Road, stated the lighting was already there and he did not see any reason for a lighting plan. Mr. Laden asked if he understood the reside nts had problems with their lighting. Mr. Rehbein replied they had not ha d complaints since they had angled the lighting down. He asked if they wanted to change the lighting. Mr. Laden replied the Board want ed to review the lighting. Mr. Tralle stated he understood they had light s going into the resi dential properties and they needed to bring these lights into complia nce. Mr. Rehbein replied he could tear the lights down, but noted he did not know the re sidents had a problem with the lights. He stated he has not had a complaint in 8 years. Mr. Nelson stated he lived in the neighborhood and there were a lot of complaints that he has heard. He stated he did not believe th e lights were aimed downward, but were aimed outward. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 5 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Rehbein stated if the City had received co mplaints, they were never conveyed to him. He indicated he could take the lights down and place them on the edge of the property facing inward. Mr. Nelson replied he believed that would solve the lighting issue. Mr. Laden asked what was the purpose and inte nt of the awning. Mr. Rehbein stated they had a smaller awning and they wanted a ne w awning to cover the drain oil tank and electrical box to protect them from the elem ents. He stated the new awning would keep the ice and snow off of the tank and electrical box. He indicated there would not be anything stored under the awning excep t the tank and el ectrical box. Mr. Pogalz asked what the Fire Department said about not having a concrete containment system on the tank. Mr. Rehbein replied it was a double walled tank and it was in compliance with all of the State Codes, as well as it being on a concrete slab. Mr. Pogalz asked if he was willing to take down the existing lighting and replace it with new lighting. Mr. Rehbein replied he was willing to do that and it would not be an expensive proposition to do that. Mr. Laden asked if the lights would be shie lded. Mr. Rehbein stated he did not know this, but they were rectangular boxes. Mr. Nelson noted there was a light on the south side of the property that was not shielded that he wanted a shield put on. Mr. Bengston stated staff would work with a pplicant to submit a lighting plan that would be in compliance with City standard s prior to the City Council meeting. Mr. Laden stated the City Comprehensive Plan stated it was the intent to eventually relocate this business. He asked if Mr. Rehbe in had been informed of this. Mr. Rehbein replied he had heard of this proposal, but he did not have any further information and they had no immediate plans to move at this time. Mr. Hyden asked if Mr. Rehbein had any pr oblem with staff’s recommendations. Mr. Rebhein replied he had no issues with th e conditions and they would meet them, including hooking up the fire sprinkling system. Chair Rafferty invited anyone for or ag ainst this CUP to make comments. There were no further comments made. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close the pub lic hearing at 7:12 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Hyden asked if they needed to add a number six addressing the lighting. Mr. Bengtson revised condition number 3 to read: Prior to this item being scheduled for the City Council a lighting plan for the entire site must be submitted for review. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 6 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Root revised condition 2 to read: A performance agreement with appropriate financial sureties between the City and the developer must be executed prior to the issuance of any building perm its for the subject site. Mr. Root made a MOTION to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow for an awning at Rehbe in Transit, 6298 Hodgson Road, subject to the conditions as noted in staff’s May 11, 2005 report and was supported by Mr. Nelson. Motion carried 6-0. C. PUBLIC HEARING for a PUD Develo pment Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat approval for Settings of Woods Edge, located in the Legacy at Woods Edge, at the SE intersection of Lake Drive and I-35W Staff stated the Community Development De partment received an application for a Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Pl at for 157 unit condominium (townhome) development in the Legacy of Wood’s Edge master plan area sout h of 35W and east of Lake Drive. This application was added to the agenda at that time so the appropriate public notices could be made in the newspaper as well as to the surrounding property owners. In the time following the notifications, City staff has had more time to review the application materials and it was determined th at not only is the application incomplete, there are also significant issues in regards to meeting the development standards for the site. Staff has sent a letter outlining the information that is still needed to complete the application, as well as th e large number of issues that still need to be worked out prior to scheduling this item for another Planning a nd Zoning Board meeting. Therefore, the 120 day review period has not begun and will not be an issue in the ongoing review of the project. As soon as the application is complete and ready for review it will be added to the next available Planning and Zoning board meeting ag enda. Staff is therefore, recommending that this item be tabled w ithout opening the public hearing or any discussion before the Board. The Board tabled this item. D. PUBLIC HEARING for an Amendment to Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Plat for Marketplace Third Addition, located at the NE corner of Lake Drive and Apollo Drive Chair Rafferty opened the pub lic hearing at 7:17 p.m. Staff stated Ryan Companies is propos ing to amend the existing Planned Unit Development (Planned Development Overlay) for the Marketplace to combine what was originally planned and platted (T he Marketplace) as four lots with individual commercial Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 7 APPROVED MINUTES buildings into two lots. Lot 1 would th en be developed with a 14,000 square foot commercial building and Lot 2 would be reserved for two future users. This request requires amending the existing Pl anned Unit Development to allow different building types and site layouts to be used. The request also requires a new Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat and eventually Final Plat to change the lot configuration. The focus of the application will be the building for Lot 1, however, periodically references will be made to the buildings on Lo t 2 since they will need to be appropriately addressed in the design standards for their future development. Staff presented their analysis and reco mmended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. The site plan must be revised to include a landscape/pedestrian circulation island in the middle of the double parking aisle for Lot 1. 2. A minimum of six shade trees must be adde d to the west side of the building along the street. 3. The architectural design standa rds approved as a part of this application must be supplied to each incoming tenant upon signature of a lease. 4. A development agreement must be executed between the developer and the City prior to the execution of a final plat for the site. 5. Appropriate drainage and utility easeme nts must be shown on the final plat. 6. All lighting fixtures used on the site mu st be in conformance with the design standards. 7. The trash enclosure must be large en ough to house both trash receptacles and recycling receptacles. 8. The trash enclosure must be constructed w ith the same materials as the proposed building. 9. The decorative lighting for this site a nd all other develope d sites within the Marketplace must be installed prior to th e issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the multi-tenant building on Lot 1. 10. The elevations must be enhanced with a stronger cornice element along the entire roof line. 11. The sunshade device proposed for the building must be similar in style to that of the example submitted for the North Carolina project, but shall be limited to three foot maximum extension from the face of the building. 12. The applicant must submit a revised plan set prior to the scheduling of this item for the City Council that incorporates all of the changes required by these conditions of approval. Mr. Root asked how the sidewalks would connect to the other portions of the site. Mr. Bengtson responded the entire building was surrounded by a sidewalk in addition to adding a sidewalk for the people who pa rked on the far side of the building. Mr. Root asked if someone could park in one place and get around without it being dangerous for them. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 8 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Laden noted this site was in the middle of the other retail sites and he believed it was the original intent to connect everything w ith sidewalks. Mr. Bengston replied staff could work with the applicant to make this a pedestrian friendly site. Mr. Root stated they needed to have pedestrian connections and without that he could not vote in favor of this. Mr. Pogalz stated he would also like a pedestrian walk along the auto service and restaurant portion of the site. Mr. Bengts on stated that the layout would be reviewed when the site plan was presented and pedestri an walkways could be added at that time. Mr. Laden asked what prompted the change in direction from the original site concept. Mr. Bengtson replied he would ask a pplicant to answer that question. Chair Rafferty invited applicant to make comment. Steve Broyer, Civil Engineer for applicant, stat ed they agreed with the linking of Kohls to the retail site and he did not believe there w ould be any issues with that. He stated he also did not have any problems linking the auto service and restaurant to this development. He noted they were relocating the storm sewer, but this would be an issue to be required the six to seven over story tree s over the sewer system . He asked if they could have that requirement removed from the conditions. Mr. Tralle noted on the origin al plan, pedestrians could go building to building and it was more of a better flow. He stated he liked th e front of the building, but he did not like the back of the building facing the way it was. He indicated he liked the concept of smaller buildings, rather than one larger strip mall. He stated he did not like this plan. Mr. Laden asked what had changed the concept of this site to this strip mall. Mark Kampmeyer, Ryan Companies, stated the orig inal plan had six buildings, but they had come to the conclusion that there were not e nough tenants to fill these buildings, so they reduced the size of the development and were proposing one strip mall. He noted market change was what drove this site plan. He asked if they could have some kind of landscape considerations to hide the back of the building. He stated that he understood their concerns with the building. Mr. Tralle expressed concern that this building was faci ng backwards and the tenants might have issues with signage. He noted th ey should not be looking at the back end of buildings when they were on a busy street. Mr. Laden stated he did not ha ve a problem combining the bu ildings, but they needed to look at a different model for this site. He stated he would like to see store fronts on both sides, such as what they had at The Village in Blaine. He believed this type of a design would work on this site. He noted if they ha d some type of this design, he would be in favor of this, but as it was being proposed, he could not support it. Mr. Tralle noted even if they had some type of a center area, it woul d be better than what was being proposed. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 9 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Kampmeyer noted there had to be a back of the building somewhere, but they could look at options. He noted no matter which way they faced the building someone would have to look at the back of it. Mr. Tralle asked what types of businesses th e tenants would be. Mr. Kampmeyer replied hair care, services uses (dental, medical), food services, etc. Chair Rafferty asked them to be creative in their design. He not ed Lake Drive was important and the back of the building should not face Lake Drive. Mr. Kampmeyer stated The Blaine Village had a number of big box retailers, so sm aller retailers were more willing to fill in the gaps. He noted The Marketplace was quite a bit smaller in scope and its drawing power, so it was difficult to design the same type of buildings as The Blaine Village had because the smaller tena nts did not want to pay for the expense of having two storefronts. He indicated they wanted to work with the Board. Mr. Hyden suggested they “fold the building in half” so there were businesses on both sides. He stated they did not want to look at a long back of a building. He noted businesses on both sides would be different, so they would not have two store fronts. He indicated as the mass started accumulating, they would have additional space to add another building. Mr. Laden stated they needed to look at a different model of a strip mall than what was being proposed. He indicated the building was attractive, but a diffe rent model was more appropriate to this site. Mr. Hyden understood a business having two stor efronts was expensive for a tenant. Mr. Kampmeyer stated all of these ideas we re good and he would have his architect investigate these comments and see if th ey can come up with a better proposal. Mr. Pogalz stated the only function the back of the building serv ed as egress and he believed they could “fold the building” with a center corridor. He stated The Blaine Village worked well because the stores were anchored either on one end or both ends with a restaurant, or other major retail ar ea. He noted by having a restaurant the key tenant at one end, he believe d this proposal could work. Chair Rafferty believed Mr. Hyden’s suggestion was a good one and there was a lot of merit to that suggestion. He noted the City n eeded to understand that if they were patient, they would have a much stronger market place. He stated it was important to get the trash facility inside the building and not have it a freestand ing structure also. Mr. Laden stated one of the things that ma de The Blaine Village successful was that it was pedestrian friendly and that element had to be added back to this site plan. Mr. Kampmeyer stated they would look at their pl an again and see what options they had. Mr. Tralle stated he persona lly liked the building, but not in this location. Chair Rafferty invited anyone for or against the PUD to make comment. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 10 APPROVED MINUTES There were no further comments made. Mr. Pogalz stated applicant s hould look at the whole site al so, including the restaurant and auto service site to determine those uses. Mr. Hyden suggested they flip flop the restaurant site a nd the auto service site. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to continue th e public hearing and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6-0. E. PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit for Northern Lights Car Wash, located at 7990 Lake Drive Staff stated the Community Development De partment received an application for a Conditional Use Permit for an automated car wa sh on the southeast corner of Lake Drive and Main Street. This application was deemed to be complete and was added to this agenda at this time. The public hearing was noticed and printe d in the appropriate newspaper outlet and mailings were se nt to surrounding property owners. The applicant, Kevin Irlbeck, has now reque sted that this application be tabled indefinitely to do further study on the feasibility of the project. He has granted the City an indefinite extension of time on the application, so staff is in agreement with the request of the applicant. The applicant will need to inform the City in writing of his decision to either continue with this application or withdr aw it from consideration. If he chooses to continue with the request, it will then be added to the next available Planning and Zoning Board agenda. The Board indefinitely tabled this item. F. Final Plat for Angie’s Acres , Al Powers, 290 Elm Street Staff stated A and J Propertie s have requested approval of a single-family residential development entitled Angie’s Acres. The s ubject property is adjacent to the southeast corner of Elm Street and Rice Lake Lane and is currently developed with one single- family dwelling which will remain. The final plat conforms to the preliminary plat layout approved with Resolution 05-29 by the City Council on March 14, 2005. The title commitment for the property and the final plat has been forwarded to the City Atto rney for review and are acceptable. All conditions of approval from the pr eliminary plat will be met through the Development Agreement and building permit review processes. Mr. Pogalz made a MOTION to recommend approval of Final Pl at for Angie’s Acres, Al Powers, 290 Elm Street, and was supporte d by Mr. Tralle. Motion carried 6-0. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 11 APPROVED MINUTES VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. AUAR Update Staff updated the Board on the AUAR. B. Temporary Signs Staff recommended the Board come to agreement on pennants and miscellaneous signage. Mr. Nelson noted there was at least one busines s in town that had tattered pennants and it was an eyesore, so he believed they did need to be regulated. Mr. Laden asked if there was a way to not regu late them, but to state the pennants needed to be maintained and in good repair. Mr. Nelson indicated that would be acceptable. Chair Rafferty stated in his personal opinion he would like to see pennants eliminated. Mr. Laden asked if the City wrote an ordi nance regulating pennants, would the current businesses using pennants need to comply with the ordinance. Mr. Smyser replied those businesses would need to comp ly with the ordinance. Mr. Hyden stated he believed there was a c onflict between pennants and banners. Mr. Smyser replied it was easy to dist inguish between the two visually. Mr. Laden stated in his opi nion, the pennants would not ha ve lettering on them. Mr. Hyden asked at what point would as pennant become a sign. Mr. Laden replied if the pennant had lettering on it, it would be a sign. Mr. Pogalz stated it was hi s understanding from the Board that pennants would be okay as long as they were maintained and had no lettering on them. Mr. Laden agreed if the pennant contained letters, it would be considered a sign and not a pennant. Mr. Tralle asked if they needed to li mit the number of pennants allowed. Mr. Laden asked if they could have different regulations in different zones and if so, when would they address this issue. Mr. Smyser replied they could have different regulations in different zone s and he had not thought about when or if they should address this issue. He stated he would like the Board to leav e this issue to the staff when it came to a final draft. Mr. Laden stated he could go either way on th e pennants, but he did see some appropriate uses for pennants. Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 12 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Hyden noted many cities simply banned pennants. Chair Rafferty asked for recommendations. He indicated he was not in favor of pennants. Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to prohibit penna nts altogether and was supported by Chair Rafferty. Motion carried 4-3. (Root , Pogalz, and Tralle opposed). Mr. Smyser asked the Board what they wanted to do with respect to miscellaneous signage on commercial busi nesses. He stated sta ff recommended prohibiting miscellaneous signed altogether. Mr. Laden agreed these types of signs should be prohibited on commercial businesses. Mr. Nelson asked if this would include the “A” type frame signs. Mr. Smyser replied this would not include those types of signage and th ey would address those types of signs at a later date. Mr. Laden noted they needed to narrow down the wording on “other non-permanent signs”. Mr. Smyser stated he would work on that wording. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to prohibit all signage on pylon signs, temporary stakes, and posts and was supported by Mr. Root. Mr. Pogalz stated he believed if they banned pennants then these ot her small signs also needed to be banned. Mr. Laden noted the distinction in his mind was that pennants did not “speak” because they had no words. He noted his only con cern what where they were going with what they were made of because he believed some metal signs, or weathe r resistant signs could be allowed. Mr. Tralle withdrew his motion a nd Mr. Root withdrew his second. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to di rect staff to write up an ordinance banning these types of signs with more clarification as to de finitions and was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Smyser stated at the next meeting th ey would be discussing real estate and development signs. C. CSAH 49/County Rd J Study Staff updated the Board on CSAH 49/County Rd J. D. VFW Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d May 1 1 , 2 005 Page 13 APPROVED MINUTES Chair Rafferty noted they had received a le tter from Bert and Deb Noren, 785 Lois Lane, regarding some issues they had with the VF W including noise, stre et parking, garbage, and the proposed helicopter in the north parking lot. Mr. Smyser stated he had spoken with the bui lding official about these concerns. He indicated with respect to the noi se by the fans, there was a si x-foot privacy fence in place and he did not know what else they could do about that, but he w ould look into this. With respect to the parking on the street, th e issue was that the pa rking lot on the south side of the building was not finished and th is was something they would ask the VFW to finish. With respect to the garbage, they would talk to the VFW about this and all garbage needed to be enclosed. With resp ect to the helicopter, the VFW had inquired about putting a nonfunctioning helicopt er on the site. He stated they had received from the Department of Defense a helicopter, which would be mounted on a pole over the pond. He stated the VFW did not need permi ssion for his helicopter and there were no City regulations not allowing it. He noted the VFW had asked permission for this helicopter, but the City had no regulations to deny it. Chair Rafferty requested all of the Board member s view the site prior to the next meeting and come back with their questions and aske d staff for a site plan of this site. Mr. Tralle stated the Mueller building was faced backwards also and did not face Lake Drive. He noted Mueller also had a pile of dirt in the City ’s right-of-way that needed to be removed. He stated at the distribution cen ter there were huge p iles of dirt and those needed to be removed. He indicated they need ed to address sites such as these to make sure they were cleaned up. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to adjourn the m eeting at 9:41 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6-0. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Altman, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc .